B Big brand owners are becoming extremely “carbon-critical” – and, they are currently turning their attention to the materials used in brand packaging. Scope 3 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions play a make-or-break role in companies’ emissions target setting – and studies have shown that the reductions in this area can be truly remarkable. Recently, Metsä Board has performed ver- ified assessments to discover how companies’ paperboards compare – carbon footprint-wise with conventional board grades used in three end use areas – healthcare, beautycare and food packaging. Optimising the paperboard used in a painkiller and a teabag packaging can cut the carbon footprint by as much as 60 per cent, based on the life cycle assessment. With a fragrance packaging, the achieved reduction potential was more than 50 per cent. Each of these assessments was conducted by Metsä Board and run separately during the past year. For this undertaking, Metsä Board enlisted
the carbon footprint by more than 60 per cent compared with corresponding grades available in European markets. FACING THE DOUBLE CHALLENGE Sustainability Manager Lari Oksala is respon- sible for the carbon footprint assessments and the actual calculations and comparisons. He points out that two major factors affect the carbon footprint in estimating paperboard packaging’s climate impact. “Whether fossil or non-fossil-based energy is used is one key issue. The other is the weight of the packaging material,” he explains. According to Oksala, Metsä Board’s fresh fibre paperboard production uses predomi- nantly fossil-free energy. In 2024, 89 per cent of Metsä Board’s total energy consumption was fossil-free. “Manufacturing of recycled fibre-based paperboards often relies on fossil fuels. Gen- erally speaking, more fossil-free electricity is available in the Nordics than elsewhere in Europe.”
12
the aid of the IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute to serve as an objective third party in verifying the results. The tech- nical background reports and the verification statements are available on Metsä Board’s website. REAL ACTION, REAL RESULTS Anne Uusitalo , Product Safety and Sustain- ability Director at Metsä Board, notes that optimising a customer’s packaging material with fresh fibre paperboards offers them “a tangible way forward” to achieve their sustainability goals. And material optimisation does not compromise performance or quality. “For various companies, the focus now turns to Scope 3, where even dramatic improvements can be made – as our studies clearly show,” says Uusitalo. In a teabag packaging, for example, switching from white-lined chipboard (WLC) to Metsä Board’s folding boxboard can reduce
NEXT STEPS By 2030, Metsä Board wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from logistics procured by the company by 30 per cent per tonne kilometre , compared with the 2022 level (Scope 3, Category 4). Furthermore, Metsä Board has decided to exclude purchased pulp and other woody raw materials from the monitoring of the progress towards its target of fossil-free raw materials and packaging materials. The pro- gress of other fossil-free raw materials can thus be monitored more easily.
BOARD MAGAZINE
Powered by FlippingBook